Persuasion

I finally found a version of Persuasion that I like! Anne doesn't look like a scullery maid in this version, just a very thin, aging, pretty woman, quite like she's described in the book. Captain Wentworth doesn't look like he's 50, nor does he look perpetually angry but rather, as he's described in the book, he hasn't aged as much as Anne and is quite handsome. And they play their parts with such conviction and realism...that's what acting is all about. They were believable. They created real characters, and it was like the characters in the book came to life. If you haven't seen this version, I urge you to find it, order it or request it from either a bookstore, or a library if you must. It's worth the price and worth the wait.

I watched the 1995 version, and the 2007 version and this one towers over the other two. Why it isn't rated higher is beyond my comprehension. The book conveys the tenderness of their relationship and this movie makes the book come to life.

Anne: played the part well enough. However, she looked near 40 instead of 27 and had the look of a heavy smoker about her. Her hair also looked like a weird hair helmet the first half of the show and did not fit regency style in the slightest.

Wentworth: enjoy his portrayal for the most part but disliked some of the directing choices they gave him. He too seemed rather old for the part but not as old as Anne.

Sir Walter: seemed more angry than annoyed and snobby. He too seemed much much older than than early 50's.

Admiral & Mrs. Croft: Mr. Croft was downright elderly looking and sounding. Though the acting was good. The screen writers and directors made him come across as a tiresome elderly man.

Mrs. Croft was acted well enough and neither here or there as memorable.

Mary: cast very well though they had her sounding VERY harsh.

Elizabeth: perfectly cast and acted. She played the part of oblivious snob quite well.

Charles: very well cast and acted. He portrayed the good natured and jovial character with ease.

Henrietta: also perfectly cast as a sweet, happy girl with pleasant manners and an open countenance.

Louisa: very poorly cast, acted and directed. She practically shouted all her lines, even her incessant giggling. She comes across as ditsy rather than just good humoured.

Mrs. Clay: perfectly smarmy and

Mr. Elliot: very charming. Too charming. Just as this character is intended. This was so well acted that he was the best casting choice for the whole movie. My new favourite Mr. Elliot across all 4 adaptations.

Lady Russel: acted just fine though not very memorably on the whole.

Mrs. Smith: also acted well and seemed a good choice for the role.

This adaptation is the most book accurate as far as story goes. Typical stiff aching transitions of the 70's and very 70's styled regency decor for the sets. Many of the dress fabric patterns were also very 70's feeling. None of this is a negative as it IS '71 BBC! I still prefer the '95, but this is a close 2nd! Leaps above '07. Leaps AND bounds above '22 which was trash.

This is one of the earlier extant BBC period adaptations. The production value is very low. However, what is great about these adaptations is that their mission was to make thorough and faithful screen versions of the novels. Creative licence is very rarely made and frowned upon. So it is very slow and clunky but if faithful is what you are after then this is the best version of Persuasion that there is so far. It runs at 3 hours and 40 mins in total with a couple minutes of credits. The acting was actually pretty decent, it felt very much like watching a theatre performance. Indeed this is how television of this time was made. It was pretty much recorded theatre in a television studio. The casting perhaps is what lets this one down. Anne is way too old and some of the family members are too similar looking so you have to keep reminding yourself who is who. Overall 6/10.

How unfortunate for this 70's effort that it's been eclipsed by the superior 1995 Roger Michell film. So OK, this TV dramatisation was made nearly 40 years ago (practically TVs infancy in the grand scheme of things). That duly said, really, the sheer murky brown 1970's-ness of it seriously detracts from the drama. "Persuasion" was the autumn of Jane Austen's sadly short writing career. Both the book and its central character, Anne Eliot, are her most mature, thoughtful and wise, in poignant contrast to the vivacity and spirit of her early work "Pride & Prejudice". This dramatisation certainly echoes that more sedate pace, but they failed to understand in 1971 that pace is everything, even in a story as gentle as this.

A motherless, unloved Anne Eliot, unmarried at 27, is forced into renewed acquaintance with the man she rejected at 18, on the advice, the 'persuasion,' of her older family friend. Her lasting affection is tried to the utmost as she must watch him court the attention of younger, prettier girls, while she herself has lost her bloom. Then, an accident shifts the balance of the drama.

This 1971 BBC TV drama takes its ample – perhaps too ample – time to tell the story. This allows for the characters to be very true to the original, but paler, less rich in tone than the 1995 film, which made considerable, but intelligent, time cuts. Despite suitably lavish sets, the costumes are a fright: each unfortunate lady is enveloped in typically high 70s sludge-coloured over-patterned vileness (highlights have to be Mrs Clay in a green velvet and slimy GOLD dress, I ask you! – and Anne Eliot's Jackson Pollock of a green, brown and yellow curtain or whatever sofa it was ripped from). This may sound trivial but with such understated fare as this, the look of the piece is important. Don't get me started on the mad towering bouffant hairdos. Of course each age loves to revile the taste of the previous, but emerging from that dark decade myself, I'm quite sure that the 70's will continue to linger on in people's minds as a benchmark for the very, very bad.

Still, Anne Firbank's somewhat too old Anne Eliot is subtle and elegant, and her slightly haughty ripostes are very much in keeping with her station - this I've never seen before, and I think Austen would approve. Emma Thompson was too old to play Elinor Dashwood in Ang Lee's "Sense & Sensibility", but her extraordinary ability to portray pathos overcame that single defect, while Firbank isn't quite as good as that. But Louisa Musgrove is a triumph of hammy overacting; and Mr Eliot is utterly unlikeable. The leads generated no chemistry whatever – quite unlike Ciaran Hinds and Amanda Root in the 1995 film.

One for the Austen fans only, who won't mind any of the above in the sheer pleasure of hearing those wonderful lines again and again.

Despite this production having received a number of poor reviews, it actually holds up quite well for its age. Note also that it is not a BBC programme, it was simply licensed to them by Granada Ventures when the Jane Austen collection was released on DVD.

So how does it compare with other adaptations of the same novel? The most well-known version these days is the 1995 film with Amanda Root as Anne Elliott and Ciaran Hinds as Captain Frederick Wentworth. That film was of course shorter but a good snapshot of the story - the earlier version, with Ann Firbank and Bryan Marshall in the same roles, had four hours to tell the story and moved at a more leisurely pace.

Firbank is a good ten years too old for her role, but she is very good - Marshall is excellent as Wentworth, a man disappointed in love, and bitter about interference. And hidden in the cast are people who also contribute - Michael Culver, later seen in Cadfael, as Harvill; Richard Vernon, later seen in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, as Admiral Croft; Noel Dyson, earlier in Coronation Street, as Mrs Musgrove.

One criticism I do have is that the hairstyles are a bit distracting, and that the costumes are awful! Still, this shouldn't detract from a hugely enjoyable Austen adaptation.